Try out the Virtual Legal Assistant to take your notes as you use the website, build your case briefs and professionally manage your legal research. Also try out our Query Alert Service and enjoy an ad-free experience. Become a Premium Member for free for three months and pay only if you like it.

Supreme Court of India

All India Judges' Association vs Union Of India on 13 November, 1991

Equivalent citations: 1992 AIR 165, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 206

Author: R Misra

Bench: Misra, Rangnath (Cj)

PETITIONER:
ALL INDIA JUDGES' ASSOCIATION
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA
DATE OF JUDGMENT13/11/1991
BENCH:
MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ)
BENCH:
MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ)
AHMADI, A.M. (J)
SAWANT, P.B.
CITATION:
1992 AIR 165 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 206
1992 SCC (1) 119 JT 1991 (4) 285
1991 SCALE (2)969
ACT:
Judicial service-Subordinate Judiciary--Judge---Duty---Na-
ture.
Judicial Service--Subordinate Judiciary--Role and obli-
gations of District judge and role and position of Trial
Judge in administration of Justice--Role of High Court in
the functioning of subordinate Judiciary, indicated.
Constitution of India, 1950---Article 50---Separation
of Judicial--Effect--Judicial Service whether separate
class.
Constitution of India, 1950---Articles 233, 234,235,
236, Concurrent List--Entry 11---Subordinate
Judiciay--Directions for setting up of an All India Judicial
Service and for bringing about certain service conditions-
Reasons indicated.
Judicial Service---Subordinate Judiciary--Directions for
setting up of an All India Judicial Service and In-service
Institute, uniformity in designations and pay scales, fixa-
tion of retirement age at 60 years, facilities of residen-
tial accommodation, transportation and working library at
the residence of Judicial Officer--Reasons indicated.
HEADNOTE:
The petitioners--All India Judges' Association filed an
application under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
for directions of this Court for setting up of an All India
Judicial Service, for bringing about uniform conditions of
service for members of the subordinate judiciary, provision
of residential accommodation, transport facility; library
and in service training for judicial officers.
Disposing of the writ petition, this Court,
HELD: 1. For a civilised society an enlightened inde-
pendent judiciary is totally indispensable. 1231 A]
2. Rendering justice is a difficult job. Unless the judi-
cial officer
207
has a reasonably worry free mental condition, it would be
difficult to expect unsoiled justice from his hands. [223 C]
3. A judge ought to be wise enough to know that he is
fallible and, therefore, even ready to learn and be coura-
geous enough to acknowledge his errors. The conduct of every
judicial officer should be above reproach. He should be
coscientious, studious, thorough, courteous, patient, punc-
tual, just, impartial fearless of public clamour, regardless
of public praise and indifferent to private, political or
partisan influences; he should administer justice according
to law, and deal with his appointment as a public trust; he
should not allow other affairs or his private interests to
interfere with the prompt and proper performance of his
judicial duties, nor should he administer the office for the
purpose of advancing his personal ambitions or increasing
his popularity. [231 F-H]
4. Under the Constitution, the concept of Rule of Law
came to be accepted and developed. Article 50 prescribed the
guideline of separating "the judiciary from the executive in
the public services of the State". This position is the
outcome of recognition of the fact that the judiciary is a
class separate from the executive. [211 D]
5. The Trial Judge is the kingpin in the hierarchical
system of administration of justice. He directly comes in
contact with the litigant during the proceedings in Court.
On him lies the responsibility of building up of the case
appropriately and on his understanding of the matter the
cause of justice is first answered. The personality, knowl-
edge, judicial restraint, capacity to maintain dignity are
the additional aspects which go into making the courts'
functioning successful. [225 F-G]
6. The District Judge is the principal judicial officer
of the district. It is the obligation of the district judge
to operate as the captain of the team both under his direct
supervision at the headquarters and in respect of the offi-
cers located in different areas within his district. Of
late, lower or subordinate courts are being established in
the outlying and rural interior. It is the obligation of the
district judge to inspect the outlying courts, maintain the
proper judicial tempo and temper of functioning in his
district and be responsible 1or the efficient running of the
system. [221 G-222 A]
7. The High Courts must take greater interest in the
proper functioning of the subordinate judiciary. Inspection
should not be a matter of casual attention. The Constitution
has vested the control of
208
the subordinate judiciary under Article 235 in the High
Court as a whole and not its Chief Justice alone. Every
Judge should, therefore, take adequate interest in the
institution which is placed under the control of the High
Court. The administrative control of the subordinate courts
of the State vests not in the Chief Justice alone but in the
Court over which the Chief Justice presides. [231 A-C]
8. There is a marked distinction between the nature of
work which executive officers and judicial officers are
called upon to discharge. The work of the judicial officers
is usually sedantry while that of the executive officer
involves a lot of physical movement. This is particularly so
in the lower cadres of both the services. In view of this
feature physical fitness is more important for an executive
officer than in case of a judicial officer while in case of
judicial officers, there is thus necessarily more of mental
activity than physical. Experience is an indispensable
factor and subject to the basic physical fitness with grow-
ing age experience grows. [217 D-E]
9. Today a judicial officer always looks at life in a
comparative way with administrative officers of his age.
Professional income at the Bar has tremendously swelled up.
Very often counsel's fee per day equals to the salary of a
judicial officer for a full month or even a longer period.
This great disparity affects peace and equilibrium in the
judicial operation. [227 D]
10. It is absolutely necessary that the Judge enjoys
freedom from personal worries. A reasonable salary appropri-
ate allowances and manageable living conditions are, there-
fore, required to be provided. [226 E]
11. An All India Judical Service should be set up and
the Union of India should take appropriate steps in this
regard. [232 C]
12. Steps should be taken to bring about uniformity in
designation of officers both in civil and the criminal side
by 31.3.1993. [232 C]
13. Retirement age of judicial officers be raised to 60
years and appropriate steps be taken by 31.12.1992. [232 C]
14. As and when the Pay Commissions/Committees are set
up in the States and Union Territories; the question of
appropriate pay scales of judicial officers be specifically
referred and considered. [232 D]
209
15. A working library at the residence of every judicial
officer has to be provided by 30.6.1992. Provision for
sumptuary allowance has to be made. [232 D]
16. Residential accommodation to every judicial officer
has to be provided and until State accommodation is avail-
able. Government should provide requisitioned accommodation
for them by 31.12.1992. In providing residential accommoda-
tion, availability of an office room should be kept in view.
[232 E]
17. Every District Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate
should have a State vehicle, Judicial officers in sets of 5
should have a pool vehicle and others would be entitled to
suitable loans to acquire two wheeler automobiles within
different time limits. [232 F]
18. In service Insititute should be set up within one
year at the Central and State or Union Territory level. [232
G]
The Law Commission of India - 14th Report, 1958 Judges:
by Professor Pannick; Law Commission of India, 1 Ith
Report--referred to.
Moti Ram Deka, etc. v. The General Manager, North East
Frontier Railway, Maligaon, Pandu, etc., [1964] 5 SCR 683;
Secretary, Government of Madras, Home Department and ,Anoth-
er v. Zenith Lamps and Electrical Ltd., AIR 1973 SC 724;
Devi Prasad Sharma and Others v. The King Emperor, 70 IA
216; Baradakanta Mishra The Registrar of Orissa, High Court
and Another, [1974] 2 SCR 282, referred to.
JUDGMENT:

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1022 of
1989.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
Sri Ramulu, A.T.M. Sampath, A.K. Srivastava and Raju
Ramchandran for the Petitioners.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by/1
RANGANATH MISHRA, CJ. This application under Article 32
of the Constitution is by the All India Judges, Association
and its working President for reliefs through directions for
setting up of an All India Judicial Service and for bringing
about uniform conditions of service for members of the
subordinate judiciary throughout the country.
Rule having been granted, notice was issued to the Union
of India and all the States and Union territories. Most of
them have responded by making returns to the Rule. A few of
the States have taken the stand that they would accept
whatever this Court ultimately decides while others have
placed their view points and yet some others have objected
to the reliefs claimed.

Mr. Sri Ramulu, Chairman of the All India Judges, Asso-
ciation personally appeared at the hearing. Mr. Raju Ram-
chandran on our request appeared to support the petition as
amicus curiae. At the hearing the standing Counsel for the
several states and Union Territories have also been heard.
The plea for setting up of an All India Judicial Service
was not seriously pressed and reliefs on the following heads
were claimed:

1. Uniformity in the Judicial cadres in the
different States and Un-

ion Territories;

2. An appropriate enhanced uniform age of
retirement for the Judicial
Officers throughout the country;

3. Uniform pay scales as far as possible to
be fixed;

4. Residential accommodation to be provided
to every Judicial Officer.

5. Transport facility to be made available
and conveyance allowance provided.

6. Adequate perks by way of Library Allow-
ance, Residential Office Allowance and Sump-
tuary Allowance to be provided.

7. Provision for inservice training to be
made.

Administration of justice and orgamsation of courts was
a provincial subject under the Government of India Act,
1935. The Constitution adopted
211
the same scheme by providing in Entry 3 of List 11 of the
Seventh Schedule the subject of administration of justice,
constitution and organisation of all courts excepting the
Supreme Court and the High Courts as a State subject. It was
only under the 42nd Amendment in 1977 that Entry 3 from List
I1 was deleted and the subject as such was taken as Entry
11-A in the Concurrent List. This had become necessary on
account of the recommendation of the Law Commission that an
All India Judicial Service should be set up.
Prior to independence, the District Judge used to be
invariably a Member of the Indian Civil Service and his
position in the district was superior to that of the Dis-
trict Magistrate. This position continued until the Indian
Civil Service came to be abolished around 1946-47. This long
association of the Civil Service with the judicial manning
had led to service conditions of both to be tied up. Crimi-
nal justice at that time was handled by Magistrates who
belonged to the Executive.

Under the Constitution, the concept of Rule of Law came
to be accepted and developed. Article 50 prescribed the
guideline of separating the judiciary from the executive in
the public services of the State. This position is the
outcome of recognition of the fact that the judiciary is a
class separate from the executive.

The control over the subordinate judiciary has been
vested in the High Court and the administrative control has
been construed to be complete and exclusive. Yet, in certain
aspects, and particularly in regard to service conditions,
the distinction has not been maintained; That is why very
often when any specific aspect relating to conditions of
service is taken up or benefits for judicial service is
considered, comparative basis between the two is adopted for
review. It is high time that this aspect is appreciated and
the administrative authorities remain alive to it.
We shall first deal with the plea for setting up of an
All India Judicial Service. The Law Commission of India in
its 14th Report in the year 1953 said:

"If we are to improve the personnel of the
subordinate judiciary, we must first take
measures to extend or widen our field of
selection so that we can draw from it really
capable person. A radical measure suggested to
us was to recruit the judicial service entire-
ly by a competitive test or examination. It
was
212
suggested that the higher judiciary could be
drawn from such competitive tests at the all-
India level and the lower judiciary can be
recruited by similar tests held at State
level. Those eligible for these tests would be
graduates who have taken a law degree and the
requirement of practice at the Bar should be
done away with.

Such a scheme, it was urged, would result in
bringing into the subordinate judiciary capa-
ble young men who now prefer to obtain immedi-
ate remunerative employment in the executive
branch of Government and in private commercial
firms. The scheme, it was pointed out, would
bring to the higher subordinate judiciary the
best talent available in the country as a
whole, whereas the lower subordinate judiciary
would be drawn from the best talent available
in the Slate".

The Commission proceeded to further state:
"Recruitment to the higher judiciary at the
all-India level in the manner suggested would
be a powerful unifying influence and serve to
counteract the existing growing regional
tendencies. In this connection, attention may
be drawn to the observations made by the
States Reorganisation Commission in regard to
the creation of the All India Services as a
major compelling necessity for the nation. The
Commission observed:. "The raisond"etre of
creating All India Services, individually or
in groups, is that officers on whom the brunt
of responsibility of administration will
inevitably fail, may develop a wide and all-
India outlook .... The present emphasis on
regional languages in the Universities will
inevitably lead to the growth of parochial
attitude, which will only be corrected by a
system of training which emphasises the all-
India point of view .......... It has not
been very easy for us to balance these consid-
erations, but we are definitely of the view
that proportion of the higher judiciary should
be recruited by competitive examination at the
all-India level so as to attract the best of
our young graduates to the judicial service.
This measure will enlarge the field of selec-
tion and bring into file higher judicial
service a leaven of brilliant young men who
will set a higher tone and level to the subor-
dinate judiciary as a whole. The personnel so
recruited will be subjected to .'m intensive
training. The rest of the higher judiciary
should, in our view, be recruited in part
directly from senior members of the Bar, and
partly by promotion from the lower subordinate
judiciary".

213

Dealing with the same subject from a
different angle, the Commission proceeded to
say:

"The great advantage that the Indian civilian
had, was the intensive and varied course of
training which he had to undergo. At the time
of his first entry into service, his training
was confined to matters pertaining to the
revenue and criminal administration alone, but
when he was taken over to the judicial side,
generally an equally intensive training in
civil law was given to him for a period of not
less than eighteen months. There can be no
doubt that a similar intensive judicial train-
ing given to a judicial officer who possesses
a law degree can be of the greatest
value .......... Indeed, it can be claimed
that a planned and systematic training such as
is contemplated by us for the judicial officer
selected for the Indian Judicial Service may
be more effective than the uncertain and
spasmodic training which may be received
during the course of a few years practice at
the Bar. These and the other considerations
referred to earlier have led us to the conclu-
sion that in the interests of the efficiency
of the subordinate judiciary, it is necessary
that an All India Service called the Indian
Judicial Service should be established. This
will need action being taken in the manner
provided by Article 312 of the Constitution".
The Law Commission has reiterated this view in subse-

quent reports. It took nearly 20 years for the Government to
take follow up action on the basis of the recommendation and
that led to the amendment of the legislafive entries as
already referred to.

This proposal of the Law Commission and the follow up
governmental action led to consultation and dialogue in the
Conference of Chief Justices of the High Courts but many of
the High Courts were of the view that setting up of an All
India Judicial Service would affect the constitutional
scheme of control of the High Courts over the subordinate
judiciary and in particular Article 235 of the Constitution.
Article 233 makes provision for appointment of District
Judges and requires that appointment to such posts has to be
made by the Governor of the State in consultation with the
appropriate High Court. Article 234 provides for recruitment
of persons other than District Judges to judicial service by
prescribing that appointments shall be made by the Governor
of the State in accordance with the Rules made by him in
that behalf after consulting the State Public Service Com-
mission and the High Court exercising the jurisdiction in
relation to such State. The post of District Judge has
ordinarily been equated with the senior scale status in the
All India Services. It was
214
perhaps not contemplated by the Law Commission that on
appointment members of the proposed All India Judicial
Service were to hold the post of District Judge. Like all
other All India Services the initial recruitment could be to
a lower rank equal to civil judge and after serving in such
post for a reasonable time appointment to the post of Dis-
trict Judge could be made. Since the Law Commission itself
was of the view that a percentage should be filled up by
direct recruitment from the Bar, the scheme envisaged by the
Law Commission would not require amendment of Article 233.
It is to be examined whether any alterations in Article 234
would be necessary or recruitment to All India Service could
be made by appropriate amendment of the State Rules contem-
plated under that Article.

Control over the subordinate courts under the constitu-
tional mechanism is vested in the High Court. Under Article
235, the provision is that the control over District Courts
and courts subordinate thereto vests in the High Court. The
main objection against implementation of the recommendation
of the Law Commission relating to the setting up of the All
India Judicial Service was founded upon the basis that
control contemplated under Article 235 of the Constitution
would be affected if an All India Judicial Service on the
pattern of All India Services Act, 1951, is created. We are
of the view that the Law Commission's recommendation should
not have been dropped lightly. There is considerable force
and merit in the view expressed by the Law Commission. An
All India Judicial Service essentially for manning the
higher services in the subordinate judiciary is very much
necessary. The reasons advanced by the Law Commission for
recommending the setting up of an All India Judicial Service
appeal to us.

Since the setting up of such a service might require
amendment of the relevant Articles of the Constitution and
might even require alteration of the Service Rules operating
in the different States and Union Territories, we do not
intend to give any particular direction on this score par-
ticularly when the point was not seriously pressed but we
would commend to the Union of India to undertake appropriate
exercise quickly so that the feasibility of implementation
of the recommendations of the Law Commission may be examined
expeditiously and implemented as early as possible. It is in
the interest of the health of the judiciary. throughout the
country that this should be done.

II
The Law Commission in the 14th Report also referred to
the various designations provided for judicial officers
working in the different States and Union Territories- It
observed:

215

"In view of the more or less uniform functions
performed by the judicial officers so various-
ly designated, it would, we think, be advisa-
ble to aim at a uniformity of designation.
There is, however, a fundamental difference in
the general scheme of distribution of judicial
business between the tower grade of officers
(munsifs) on the one hand, and the higher
grade of officers (subordinate judges) on the
other. The first has limited pecuniary juris-
diction while the second, generally speaking,
has unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction. We
would, therefore, suggest that the State Judi-
cial Service-Class II should consist of civil
judges who should be designated as civil
judges of the senior and junior divisions.
Officers corresponding to munsifs would be
designated as civil judges (junior division)
and those corresponding to subordinate judges
would be designated as civil judges (senior
division)".

If reference is made to Article 236 of the Constitution,
it would be noticed that the expression "District Judge" has
been defined to include Judge of a City Civil Court, Addi-
tional District Judge, Joint District Judge, Assistant
District Judge, Chief Judge of a Small Causes Court, Chief
Presidency Magistrate, Additional Chief Presidency Magis-
trate, Sessions Judge, Additional Sessions Judge and Assist-
ant Sessions Judge. This definition in Article 236 covers
the higher section of the State Judicial Service both in the
civil and criminal sides. The definition is only inclusive
and in implementing the recommendations of the Law Commis-
sion to simplify the designations by saying that the
hierarchy of subordinate judicial officers would be District
Judge or Additional District Judge, below him Civil Judge
(Senior Division) and below him Civil Judge (junior divi-
sion) does not go against the constitutional scheme nor does
it require any amendment of the Constitution. If there be
any laws operating in the States, perhaps the same may have
to be appropriately modified or altered if the uniformity
recommended by the Law Commission has to work out.
We are inclined to adopt the view of the Law Commission.
On the civil side, the State Judicial Service, therefore,
should be classified as District or Additional District
Judge, Civil Judge (senior division) and Civil Judge (Junior
division). On the criminal side, there should be a Sessions
Judge or Additional Sessions Judge and below him there
should be the Chief Judicial Magistrate and Magistrates
provided for in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Appropriate
adjustments, if any, may be made of existing posts by indi-
cating their equivalence with any of these categories. The
process of bringing about such uniformity would require some
time
216
and perhaps some monitoring. We direct that the Ministry of
Law and Justice of the Union Government would carry on the
monitoring activity and all the States and Union Territories
would follow the pattern indicated above by March 31, 1993.
III
One of the issues debated at the hearing related to the
age of retirement. The Constitution has fixed the age of
retirement of Judges in the High Courts and the Supreme
Court at 62 and 65 years respectively. There is no constitu-
tional prescription of the age of retirement of the members
of the subordinate judiciary and in India that is controlled
by the relevant rules obtaining in the different States and
Union Territories and it is 58 years at present excepting in
the State of Kerala where the age of superannuation is 55
years for all State Government employees including the
members of the State Judicial Service.

It is the claim of the petitioners that the age of
retirement of the officers of the subordinate judiciary
should be fixed at 60 years inasmuch as the basic qualifica-
tion for recruitment to the service requires every officer
to have in the minimum a bachelors degree in law which is
acquirable after becoming a graduate. Thus, while for normal
civil service a graduate is eligible, for recruitment to the
judicial service a minimum further period of three years
becomes necessary to acquire the basic qualification. In
many of the states and the Union Territories, for recruit-
ment to the post in the judicial service a basic period of
experience at the Bar is a pre-requisite. Thus, while for
the civil service the age of recruitment varies between 25
and 28 years, for judicial service at the basic level most
of the States permit entry upto the age of 32. In some of
the States where direct recruitment of judicial officers for
an in between stage is permitted, the age of entry is even
upto 35 years. Article 233(2) of the Constitution provides:

"A person not already in service of the Union
or of the State shall only be eligible to be
appointed a District Judge if he has been for
not less than seven years an advocate or a
pleader and is recommended by the High Court
for appointment".

Keeping this constitutional requirement in view in
respect of direct recruitment for District judge, entrance
is permitted upto a later age in many States. Thus at the
point of entry into service there is a marked distinction
between civil service and the judicial service.
Notwithstanding these special features the history of the
service
217
would show that no distinction has been maintained in regard
to the age of retirement between officers of the civil
service and the officers of the judicial service and over
the years the same rule has been applied to both. This Court
in Moti Ram Deka, etc. v. The General Manager, North East
Frontier Railway, Maligaon, Pandu, etc., [1964] 5 SCR 683
pointed out:

"In regard to the age of superannuation, it
may be said prima facie that rules of superan-
nuation which are prescribed in respect of
public service in all modern States are based
on considerations of life expectation, mental
capacity of the civil servants having regard
to the climatic conditions under which they
work, and the nature of the work they do. They
are not fixed on any ad hoc basis and do not
involve the exercise of any discretion. They
apply uniformity to all public servants fail-
ing under the category in respect of which
they are framed ..... "

Nature of work is thus one of the considerations rele-

vant to fixing the age of retirement.

There is a marked distinction between the nature of work
which executive officers and judicial officers are called
upon to discharge. The work of the judicial officers is
usually sedantry while that of the executive officers in-
volves a lot of physical movement. This is particularly so
in the lower cadres of both the services. In view of this
feature physical fitness is more important for an executive
officer than in case of a judicial officer while in case of
judicial officers, there is thus necessarily more of a
mental activity than physical. Experience is an indispens-
able factor and subject to the basic physical fitness with
growing age experience grows.

As already indicated, retirement age for High Court
Judges is 62 years. A sizable portion of the manning in the
High Court is done by elevating District Judges and those
who are elevated continue upto the age of 62 years like
directly elevated members of the Bar to the High Court.
There are certain services in the States where retire-
ment is fixed at the age of 60 years taking into account the
special type of work the officers are called upon to per-
form. For instance, throughout the country teachers of
universities are allowed to serve upto 60 years of age.
Employees under some of the corporations also go upto the
age of 60. Scientific Research Officers are also allowed in
many cases the benefit of 60 years age of retirement.
Mr. Poti for the State of Kerala raised serious objection to
raising
218
the age of retirement of judicial officers to a common level
of 58 years by contending that this would lead to unrest in
the other services of the State and everyone would press for
the age of retirement being enhanced to 58. In fact, Kerala
had once experimented with the enhanced age for all and has
reverted back to the age of 55. The main ground raised by
Mr. Poti to resist the proposal of enhancement is that in
the State of Kerala the level of literacy is high and unem-
ployment is acute. If the age of retirement is enhanced the
scope of the unemployed to get employment would be adversely
affected. We are not impressed by the submission of Mr. Poti
on this score. The total number of judicial officers of
every category in the State may not exceed 3,000 or so. This
certainly is not such a big number that might create unem-
ployment problem in the event of the age of superannuation
being brought to the all India level of 58 or even enhanced
to a higher limit.

The Law Commission in its 14th Report dealt with this
aspect at page 2 13 of the report and said:

"There is yet another reason why the question
of the age of retirement of the subordinate
judiciary should be treated differently from
that in other State Services. As noticed
earlier a judicial officer enters service at a
comparatively higher age than a recuit to the
executive or administrative services. It
would, therefore, be proper that the retire-
ment age of a judicial officer should be
relatively higher than that of an executive
officer, so as to enable him to serve for the
full number of years if he retains his fitness
and capacity of work till he reaches such
higher age.

We, therefore, recommend that the retirement
age of the subordinate judiciary in all States
should be raised to 58 years. Such a measure
will tend to raise the tone and morale of the
judicial service as a whole. It will also be
consistent with our recommendation to raise
the age of retirement of High Court Judges to
65 years."

The recommendation that superannuation should be fixed
at 58 for judicial officers was made at a time when in
public services retirement was prescribed at the age of 55.
Considering the enhancement of the longevity of human life
and taking all other relevant considerations into account,
all the States and all the Union Territories have now en-
hanced the age of retirement to 58 years excepting, as
already pointed out, in the case of the State of Kerala. We
are of the view that on the logic which was adopted by the
Law Commission and for the reasons which we have
219
indicated the age of retirement of judicial officers should
be 60 years. We accordingly direct that appropriate altera-
tions shall be made in the Rules obtaining in the States and
Union Territories in respect of judicial service so as to
fix the age of retirement at 60 years with effect from
December 31, 1992. We have given a long period so that
appropriate amendments may be made in the meantime.
IV
We shall now deal with the claim for appropriate pay
scales and on, as nearly as possible, uniform basis. The
14th Report of the Law Commission dealt with this matter at
page 163 of the report and said:

"It is the matter of scales of pay and remu-
neration, the judiciary compares unfavourably
with the executive branches of the Government.
It is true that, generally speaking, the
scales of pay of the judicial officers and the
corresponding executive officers are identical
in many of the States. However, it has to be
remembered that the executive officers are, by
and large, recruited at a much younger age
than the judicial officers. The entrant to the
judicial services is required to be a graduate
in law and in most of the States it is also
necessary that he should have practised for a
certain number of years at the Bar. On the
other hand, for recruitment to the executive
branches of Government service, a degree in
arts or science is, generally speaking, suffi-
cient. In the result, a person entering the
judicial service does so when he is about 26
or 27 years of age and at a time when his
contemporaries who have entered the executive
service of the Government have already ac-
quired a certain seniority in the service and
have come to draw a higher salary. It will
thus be seen that a person joining the judi-
cial service starts with a lower remuneration
than what he would have received if he had
entered the executive service for a few years
earlier. It has also to be noted that owing to
the lesser proportion of superior posts in the
judicial service promotions come less quickly
to the judicial officers, and a person who has
entered the service as a munsif, assuming that
he is fit and fully qualified, takes much
longer time to become a district judge than
would an equally competent deputy collector to
reach the position of a collector. Again the
judicial officer, having started at a later
age, has a shorter span of service than the
executive officer and this affects his pension
and other retirement benefits".

220

We had called for the prevailing pay scales of the
different judicial cadres in the States and the Union Terri-
tories and the same have been made available to us. We found
that there is wide violence in the pay structure prevailing
in the various States and Union Territories and for the same
nature of work performed by the judicial officers they are
remunerated differently. It is difficult for us on the data
now placed to get into the exercise of fixing the appropri-
ate pay scales. We suffer a handicap in the absence of full
details necessary for fixing the appropriate pay scales on
comparative basis. Again, we are apprehensing that if we
enter into the matter and say something in a final way, it
is possible that in some States benefits which are now
available may be taken away or adversely affect some offi-
cers. For these reasons, we do not propose to finally exam-
ine the propriety of the existing pay scales nor do we
direct any pay scales to be fixed.

A Pay Commission for the Central Government employees
was appointed about 8 years back and on the basis of its
Report the revised benefits have been given effect to from
January 1, 1986. Following that pattern, most of the States
have either given the Central scales or appointed their own
commissions or committees and given the revised benefits to
their officers. It appears that with an interval of 10 years
or so such a commission is being appointed and pay scales
are being reviewed. Such an exercise is likely to be under-
taken within less than three or four years. We are of the
view that the claim on this score can be better handled when
the pay commissions or committees in the States are set up
to review the position. We direct that as and when such
commissions or committees are set up in the States and Union
Territories hereafter, they separately examine and review
the pay structure of judicial officers keeping in view all
relevant aspects.

V.

Under this head, however, we would like to deal with the
claim for various allowances. Unlike the administrative
officer, the judicial officer is obliged to work for long
hours at home. When he reserves a judgment he has usually to
prepare the same at his residence. For that purpose, he has
to read the records as also the judicial precedents cited by
counsel for the adversaries. Even otherwise with a view to
keeping himself uptodate about the legal position he has to
read judgments of his own High Court, other High Courts and
of the Supreme Court. He has also to read legal journals.
The judicial officer very often has no provision of an
officer at his residence. Unless a reasonable allowance is
provided for maintaining an office, it became very difficult
for him to undertake the various aspects
221
of the exercise referred to above. We are of the view that a
residential office allowance should be admissible to every
judicial officer. The same for the civil judge (junior
division) and the civil judge (senior division) be fixed at
the rate of Rs. 250 per month and officers of the higher
category the monthly allowance should be Rs. 300.
Law books, Law repons and legal journals are indispens-
able to a judicial officer. They are in fact his tools and
in case a junior officer has to discharge his duties satis-
factorily he has to get acquainted with these. His ability
to perform his duty to a considerable extent depends upon
his reading habit and devoting a sizeable working time to
reading all this literature. Reading habit is indispensable
to a judicial officer and possession of a small library of
one's own helps generation of the proper reading habit. Law
books and Law journals have in particular become very costly
these days. One standard Law journal for the decisions of
the High Court, another for the decisions of this Court and
one or two Standard Law journals on the average would cost
about Rs. 200 a month.

There is no existing system of providing Law books and
journals to the officers of the lower judiciary. Many of the
judicial officers in the lower ranks have their working
places away from the district headquarters where the seat of
the district judge is located. There is perhaps at every
district headquarter a small library but the number of books
is small and more than one copy of many of the books would
not be available. Therefore, whether it is at the district
headquarter or in areas away therefrom, effective library
facility is not available. We are of the view that a uniform
pattern of small library should be provided to every judi-
cial officer. We accordingly direct that such a library
shall be made available by 30.6.2992 to every judicial
officer and the District Judge should have provision made in
his budget for the said residential library for every judi-
cial officer under his control. The High Court should moni-
tor this aspect effectively so that without loss of time, a
handy library may be at the disposal of every judicial
officer.

The District Judge is the principal judicial officer of
the district. Ordinarily every revenue district has a dis-
trict judge and his seat is located at the headquarter. In
heavy stations, the district judge has a team of additional
district judges to assist him. There would also be a number
of judicial officers of lower categories working at the
headquarters. It is the obligation of the district judge to
operate as the captain of the team both under his direct
supervision at the headquaters and in respect of the offi-
cers located in different areas within his district. Of
late, lower or subordinate courts are being established in
the outlying and rural interior. It is the
222
obligation of the district judge to inspect the outlying
courts, maintain the proper judicial tempo and temper of
functioning in his district and be responsible for the
efficient running of the system.

In many of the States the prevailing practice is that
the district judge takes a monthly meeting with the collec-
tor and district magistrate and the superintendent of po-
lice. He also meets the members of the Bar. Now and then he
meets his judicial officers those at the headquarters as
also the others who are in the interior. It is desirable
that the district judge devotes some time as frequently as
possible and at least once a week to meet the judicial
officers beyond the working hours, discusses working prob-
lems of his officers and forms his own opinion about now
the work is being done. A weekly assessment of such perform-
ance generates even temper of judicial activity and upholds
the tempo being maintained at the appropriate level. There
is not yet any definite system of judicial training in most
of the States and Union Territories. A judicial officer with
his first posting or until he acquires adequate experience
requires guidance. It should ultimately be the obligation of
the district judge to provide the same, we are of the view
that to the post of district judge a monthly allowance of
Rs. 300 by way of sumptuary allowance should be available to
enable him to extend small courtesies at such meetings. The
chief judicial magistrate does some of these activities in
respect of the magistrates handling criminal work. In our
opinion he should be entitled to a sum of Rs. 200 per month
by way of sumptuary allowance. We are aware of the fact that
under the conditions of Service Act of High Court Judges, a
sumptuary allowance of Rs. 300 is payable to them every
month. Now that we have directed that Rs. 300 should be
fixed for the district judges, we command that the sumptuary
allowance fixed for the High Court Judges may be enhanced
suitably. These allowances shall be payable from 1.4.1992.
We would like to add that this allowance is intended for
utilisation to the full extent for entertaining judicial
officers in connection with preformance of duty and would
not be considered as a perk for being included in the hands
of the recipient as his income.

VI
Provision of an official residence for every judicial
officer should be made mandatory. A judicial officer to work
in a manner expected of him has to free himself from undue
obligations of others, particularly owners of buildings
within his jurisdiction who ordinarily may have litigations
before him. This is mostly the case in rural areas where
outstation judicial courts are located. We are aware of
cases where a rural court is located in the building belong-
ing to a lawyer or a client. Even the residential accom-

223

modation of the judicial officer belongs to people of that
category. Such a situation often gives occasion to personal
embarrassment to the judicial officer and it has to be
avoided.

Expenditure on residential accommodation in a family
budget is not ordinarily to exceed 15 per cent of the month-
ly income, otherwise it becomes difficult for the person
concerned to make his two ends meet. A judicial officer who
is not provided residential accommodation is obliged to go
in for rented accommodation. In view of the prevailing rate
of rent, the smallest accommodation that can be taken may
often cost 75 per cent to 100 per cent of the monthly sal-
ary, a situation which cannot be contenanced by any logic.
It is absolutely necessary that appropriate conditions
should be provided for the judicial officer and he should
have reasonable mental peace in order that he may perform
his duties satisfactorily. Rendering justice is a difficult
job. It is actually a divine act. Unless the judicial offi-
cer has a reasonable worry free mental condition, it would
be difficult to expect unsoiled justice from his hands.
Very often building projects are undertaken for provid-
ing residential accommodation to public officers but the
requirement of the judicial ofricer is not taken into ac-
count for one reason or the other. Control of the State
purse is in the hands of the executive. As appropriate share
of construction expenses is not being provided towards
accommodation of judicial officers, they do not have any
quota in the building projects. As a result of this over the
years at several places throughout the country residential
accommodation for judicial officers has turned out to be
scanty. Many judicial officers dread postings in Metropoli-
tan towns as residential accommodation is not available and
the rental would be exorbitant in respect of private accom-
modation. The cost of living also becomes heavy.
We take judicial notice of the fact that the Planning
Commission of the Central Government is considering accept-
ance of the subordinate judiciary as a plan subject. Provid-
ing adequate residential accommodation should be considered
as a priority. Until adequate government accommodation is
available, it should be the obligation of the State at the
instance of the High Court to provide requisitioned accommo-
dation for every judicial officer according to his entitle-
ment and recovery of not more than twelve and a half per
cent of salary of the officer towards rent should be made
and the balance should be met by the State Exchequer. We
would emphasise the need of provision of a separate and
exclusive office room as an indispensable component of every
such official residence and the accommodation should take
into account this feature. As a long term measure, Govern-
ment accommodation should be constructed to meet the
224
need of the judicial officers at their respective stations.
This should be a matter for the Planning Commission to
review and the State Governments to cooperate and undertake
construction activity. The Governments of the States and the
Union Territories would take some time to implement this pan
of the direction. In case for some reason, the Planning
Commission does not come forward to take up the matter
before January, 1992, the Chief Justice of every High Court
should set up a committee with him as Chairman where two
senior Judges of the Court and the Secretaries of Finance,
Law and Works should be members and annual planning of
construction of residences should be made. We accordingly
fix the outer limit of December 31,1992 when this part of
the direction would become fully operative.
VII
We shall now deal with the claim for transport. In most
of the States the district judge has been provided a motor
car and in some of the States the chief judicial magistrate
is also provided with such transport, be it a car or a jeep.
There are still some States like Rajasthan, Haryana and
Madhya Pradesh where provision of a car for every district
judge has not yet been made. We direct that every district
judge should be provided with a car by March 31, 1992, and
it shall be the obligation of the other States where such
facility has not open provided to ensure the same within the
time limit.

The chief judicial magistrate is a touring officer apart
from doing trial work as a magistrate. Mandate of the Code
of Criminal Procedure requires him to undertake some tout-
ing. The quality of criminal justice administration would
very much depend upon the mobility of the chief judicial
magistrate. We, therefore, direct that in such States and
Union Territories where provision of independent transport
for the chief judicial magistrate has not been made, the
same should be done by September 30, 1992. We are. further
of the view that in stations with more than four judicial
officers a common transport should be provided for the
purpose of taking them from the residence to the court and
back and meeting their other official purposes and such
vehicle should be placed under the control of the seniormost
officer in the pool. The arrangement should be that for
every five officers, there should be a vehicle. Provision
for this aspect should be made by March 31, 1993. This
direction has become necessary as judicial officers should
not be forced to travel along with litigants and lawyers. In
many sensitive cases, records are carried by them. Often
judgments to be pronounced are also taken by them. In some
disturbed areas, instances of harassment to judicial offi-
cers taking advantage of their using
225
common transport have come to light. We direct that every
State and Union Territory would file a compliance report in
the Registry of this Court in respect of these three aspects
within one month from the expiry of the outer limit indicat-
ed for each of them.

There are several outlying courts where the number of
officers would not be more than five. We do not intend to
provide any independent transport for them but such officers
who ask for loan for purchase of a two wheeler automobile
should immediately be provided the same. Appropriate funds
should be made available for such purpose. A pool car should
have 60 litres of petrol per month and a judicial officer
owing a scooter would be entitled to an allowance of Rs. 200
per month.

We are alive to the fact that our directions involve a
burden on the State Exchequer. Perhaps some justification as
to why these expenses should not be grudged must now be
indicated. Professor Pannick in his book entitled "Judges"
has observed:

"Judges do not have an easy job. They repeat-
edly do what the rest of us seek to avoid;
make decisions".

He further added:

"Judges are mere mortals but they are asked to
perform a function that is utterly divine".

Professor Harold Laski once wrote to Justice Oliver
Holmes that 'he wished that people could be persuaded to
realise that judges are human beings; it would be a real
help to jurisprudence'.

The Trial Judge' is the kingpin in the hierachical
system of administration of Justice. He directly comes in
contact with the litigant during the proceedings in Court.
On him lies the responsibility of building up of the case
appropriately and on his understanding of the matter the
cause of justice is first answered. The personality, knowl-
edge, judicial restraint, capacity to maintain dignity are
the additional aspects which go into making the court's
functioning successful.

Krishna Iyer, J. described the scene very graphically thus:

"Law is a means to an end and justice is that
end. But in actuality, Law and Justice are
distant neighbours; sometimes even strange
hostiles. If law shoots down justice, the
people shoot down law and lawlessness paraly-
ses development, dis-

226

rupts order and retards progress. This
is the current scene". It calls for serious
introspection.

The Law Commission in its 14th Report said:
"If the public is to give profound respect to
the judges the judges should by their conduct
try and observe it; not by word or deed should
they give cause for the people that they do
not deserve the pedestal on which we expect
the public to place them. It appears to us
that not only for the performance of his
duties but outside the court as well a Judge
has to maintain an aloofness amounting almost
to self imposed isolation".

The Commission quoted Sir Winston Churchill
who had said:

"A form of life and conduct far more severe
and restricted than that of ordinary people is
required from judges and though unwritten has
been most strictly observed. They are at once
privileged and restricted; they have to
present a continuous aspect of dignity and
conduct".

These prescriptions for a Judicial Officer, therefore,
result in a restricted life. Austerity is a quality to be
practised by every Judge--personally as also in his public
functioning. This necessarily gives rise to a situation
where the Judge must have patience, perseverance and pains-
taking habits. In order that a Judge may be able to put in
these aspects into his public functioning it is absolutely
necessary that the Judge enjoys freedom from personal wor-
ries. A reasonable salary, appropriate allowances and man-
ageable living conditions are, therefore, required to be
provided.

For quite a few years the conditions of service of
Judges of the superior Courts and those of the public offi-
cers in the Executive side had been put at par excepting
such provisions as were contained in the Government of India
Act, 1935 or under the Constitution. For the first time it
was accepted that separate Conditions of Service should be
provided and Conditions of Service Acts for the High Court
and Supreme Court Judges were separately enacted in 1954.
Those statutes and the Schedules therein even now contain
provisions to the effect that matters for which provisions
have not been made by the statutes are to continue to be the
same as provided for the officers in the Executive wing as
named. In a democratic polity the role of the judiciary is
indispensable. The efficient functioning of the Rule of Law
under the aegis of which our democratic society can thrive
requires an efficient, strong and enlightened judiciary. And
to have it that way the Nation has to pay to the price.
There was a time when a
227
Judge enjoyed a high status in Society. Very often a suc-
cessful Member of the Bar earning a high income favourably
responded to the invitation of the Chief Justice to accept
Judgeship. Thai no more is the position. The sense of pro-
fessional obligation has died down for reasons more than
one; but perhaps the most eloquent one is loss of social
status of the judge. The effect of this position in respect
of the higher judiciary has its impact on the subordinate
judiciary too. Half a century back a Judicial officer even
of the lowest category enjoyed great social status. He was
looked upon with a sense of reverence. He led a life in tune
with the recommendations of the Law Commission in its 14th
Report. He had the training of limiting his wants and man-
aged to live a contented life by making his two ends meet
with limited resources of small salary. That philosophy of
life has vanished or is fast vanishing. A great social
change has over taken today's society. Life has become
competitive; demands of life have increased; and aptitudes
have changed. Therefore, today a judicial officer always
looks at life in a comparative way with administrative
officers of his age. Professional income at the Bar has
tremendoulsy swelled up. Very often counsel's fee per day
equals to the salary of a judicial officer for a full month
or even a longer period. This great disparity affects peace
and equilibrium in the judicial operation.
As early as 1958 the Law Commission said:

"As we shall point out, later the problem has
since grown in dimension because there is
unmistakable testimony that the standards of
the judicial officers recruited from the Bar
and other sources have during recent years
fallen in a substantial degree for various
reasons. This has been almost the unique view
expressed by the witnesses .before us. It is
thus obvious that no scheme of review of
judicial administration will be effective or
worthwhile unless the basic problem of provid-
ing a trained and capable judicial personnel
is satisfactorily solved"

This was adequate and timely notice to the Government
and its people. Instead of attending to the problem then, 33
long years have been allowed to roll by and what was then
said as a growing dimension has grown to devalue the system.
Its resurrection has, therefore, become more costly.
It is perhaps useful to recall here the prophetic warn-
ing sounded by Robert Ingersoll:

"A government founded on anything except
liberty and justice cannot stand. All the
wrecks on either side of the stream of time,
all the wrecks of the great cities, and all
the nations that
228
have passed away---all are a warning that no
nation founded upon injustice can stand. From
the sand enshrouded Egypt, from the marble
wilderness of Athens, and from every fallen or
crumbling stone of the once mighty Rome, comes
a wail as it were, the cry that no nation
founded on injustice can permanently stand".
Society, therefore, must understand the problem. Solu-

tion to the problem would depend upon realisation of the
fact that the more capable people at the Bar are not willing
to accept offers of judicial appointments. The plea that the
other wings, in the States would demand inprovement in their
scales of pay is not a relevant feature at all when the
problem is viewed from this angle. We hope and trust that
society would generate the appropriate understanding of the
matter and no Government would come forward to take the
stand that if the pay scales and perks of the Judicial
officers are improved similar demands would come from other
wings of Government.

Even in the existing system there are some posts which
carry special pay that is on account of the fact that there
is more of basic equipment demanded and the nature of work
is different and judicial service satisfies both and, there-
fore, Government can always prescribe a higher pay scale for
Judicial Officers.

In 1986 there was a Conference of the Chief Justices of
the High Courts, Chief Ministers and the Law Ministers of
the States called by the then learned Chief Justice of India
and the Ministry of Law and Justice.

The then Chief Justice of India and the Law Minister of
the Central Government tried their best to make the State
Governments and the Union Territories understand the basic
problem. While some improvements came as a result of the
Conference for the higher judiciary, the claim of the subor-
dinate judiciary remained unattended.

We would like to point out that dispensation of justice
is an inevitable feature in any civilised society. Mainte-
nance of law and order require the presence of an efficient
system of administration of criminal justice. Under the
Civil Code, Court fee is realised under the Court Fee Act.
For some time demand to abolish it has been made but the
States have abandoned the idea on account of the demand by
the States of compensation from the Centre in case of aboli-
tion of Court fee. Court fee is not a tax and is a fee as
has been' held by a Constitution Bench of this Court in
Secretary, Government of Madras, Home Department and another
v. Zenith Lamps and Electrical Ltd., AIR 1973 SC 724. In
Paragraph 29 of this
229
Judgment Sikri, CJ speaking for this Court pointed out:

"It seems to us that the separate mention of
'fees taken in Court' in the Entries referred
to above has no other significance than that
they logically come under Entries dealing with
administration of Justice and courts. The
draftsman has followed the scheme designed in
the Court Fees Act, 1870 or dealing with fees
taken in court at one place. If it was the
intention to distinguish them from fees in
List II Entry 66, surely some indication would
have been given by the language employed. If
these words had not been separately mentioned
in List I, Entry 77 and List II ...........
It seems plain that 'fees taken in court' are
not taxes, for if it were so, the word 'taxes'
would have been used or some other indication
given. It seems to us that this conclusion is
strengthened by two considerations. First,
taxes that can be levied by the Union are
mentioned in List I from Entry 82; mentioned
in List II taxes that can be imposed start
from Entry 45. Secondly, the very use of the
words 'not including fees taken in any court'
in Entry 95 List 1, and Entry 66 List II,
shows that they would otherwise have fallen
within these Entries. It follows that 'fees
taken in court' cannot be equated to "Taxes".
If this is so, is there any essential differ-
ence between fees taken in court and other
fees ? We are unable to appreciate why the
word 'fees, bears a different meaning in Entry
77, List I and Entry 96 List I or Entry 3 List
II and Entry 66 List II. All these relevant
cases on the nature of 'fees' were reviewed in
India Mica and Micanite Industries Ltd. v. The
State of Bihar. AIR 1971 SC 1182 at page 1186,
by Hegde J. and he observed:

"From the above discussion, it is clear that
before any levy can be upheld as a fee, it
must be shown that the levy has reasonable
co-relationship with the services rendered by
the Government. In other words, the levy must
be proved to be a quid pro quo for the serv-
ices rendered. But in these matters it will be
impossible to have an exact co-relationship.
The correlationship expected is one of a
general character and not as of arithmetical
exactitude".

It is not our intention to raise a dispute on this
aspect. We adverted to these authorities and the views of
this Court to bring support for the view that what is col-
lected as Court fee at least be spent on the administration
of Justice instead of being utilised as a source of general
revenue
230
of the States. Undobutedly the income from court fees is
more than the expenditure on the administration of Justice.
This is conspicuously noticeable from the figures available
in the publication in the Ministry of Law and Justice.
What we have said above should be adequate justification
for making provision with a view to making judicial func-
tioning viable.

We would like to recall a part of the funeral oration on
Mr. Justice Story delivered some 150 years back by Daniel
Webster:-

"Justice, Sir, is the greatest interest of man
on earth. It is the ligament which holds
civilised beings and civilised nations togeth-
er. Wherever her temple stands, and so long as
it is duly honoured, there is a foundation for
social security, general happiness and the
improvement and progress of our race. And
whoever labours on this edifice with useful-
ness and distinction. whoever clears its
foundations, strengthens its pillars, adorns
its entaplateures, or contributes to raise its
august dome still higher in the skies, con-
nects himself in name and frame and character
with that which is and must be as durable as
the frame of human society".

To those who control the purse what Webster said should
provide the direction.

VIII
One of the claims advanced before us was for provision
of inservice training for judicial officers. This we consid-
er as a must. In fact, the Law Commision in one of its
recent reports has advised that inservice institutes should
be immediately set up. About a year back the Union Govern-
ment had proposed the setting up of an All India Inservice
Institute but nothing more has been done about it. In some
of the States like Uttar Pardesh and Andhra Pradesh, such
inservice institutes are functioning. We are of the view mat
in service institutes are indispensable for the upkeep of
the efficiency of judicial service. We direct that an All
India institute of Inservice Training for higher officers of
the judiciary including the district judges and a State
level institute for training of the other member, of the
subordinate judiciary within each of the States and Union
Territories or one common institute for more than one State
or Union Territory should be set up within one year from now
and at any rate nor later than December 31, 1992. This has
to be orgainised by respective High Courts.

231

Before we part, we must indicate with all the emphasis
at our command that the system has to be saved as for a
civilised society an enlightened independent judiciary is
totally indispensable. The High Court must take greater
interest in the proper functioning of the subordinate judi-
ciary. Inspection should not be a matter of casual atten-
tion. The Constitution has vested the control of the subor-
dinate judiciary under Article 235 in the High Court as a
whole and not its Chief Justice alone. Every Judge should,
therefore, take adequate interest in the institution which
is placed under the control of the High Court. We may point
out that that in what Lord Aktins said in Devi Prasad Sharma
and others v. The King Emperor, 70 IA 216. And it has been
approved by a Constitution Bench in Baradakanta Misra v. The
Registrar of Orissa High Court and Another, [1974] 2 SCR

282. It should be remembered by all Judges of the High Coart
viz., that the administrative control of the subordinate
courts of the states vest nor in the Chief Justice alone but
in the Court over which the Chief Justice
presides.

Surger, CJ of the American Supreme Court once said:

"A sense of confidence in ,he Courts is essen-
tial to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty
for a free people and it is for the subordi-
nate Judiciary by its action and the High
Court by its appropriate control to ensure
it".

It is useful to remember what President Lin-
coln often said:

"If you once forfeit the confidence of your
fellow citizens you can never regain their
respect and esteem".

It is time we mention about society's expectation from
the Judicial Officers. A judge ought to be wise enough to
know that he is fallible and, therefore, even ready to learn
and be courageous enough to acknowledge his errors
The conduct of every judicial officer should be above
reproach. He should be conscientious, studious, thorough,
courteous, 'patient, punctual, just, impartial, fearless of
public clamor, regardless of public praise, and indifferent
to private, political or partisan influences; he should
administer justice according to law, and deal with his
appointment as a public trust; he should not allow other
affairs or his private interests to interfere with the
prompt and proper performance of his judicial duties, nor
should he administer the office for the purpose of advancing
his personal ambitions or increasing his popularity.

232

We would like to part with the matter by recalling a
statement of Edmund Burke:

"All persons possessing a portion of power
ought to be strongly and awfully impressed
with an idea that they act in trust, and that
they are to account for their conduct in that
trust to the one great Master, Author and
Founder of Society".

We would now briefly indicate the direc-
tions we have given in the judgment:

(i) An All India Judicial Service should be
set up and the Union of India should take
appropriate steps in this regard.

(ii) Steps should be taken to bring about
uniformity in designation officers both in
civil and the criminal side by 31.3.1993.

(iii) Retirement age of judicial officers be
raised to 60 years and appropriate steps are
to be taken by 31.12. 1992.

(iv) As and when the Pay Commissions/Commit-

tees are set up in the States and Union Terri-
tories; the question of appropriate pay scales
of judicial officers be specifically referred
and considered.

(v) A working library at the residence of
every judicial officer has to be provided by
30.6.1992. Provision for sumptuary allowance
as stated has to be made.

(vi) Residential accommodation to every
judicial officer has to be provided and until
State accommodation is available, Government
should provide requisitioned accommodation for
them in the manner indicated by 31.12.1992. In
providing residential accommodation, avail-
ability of an office room should be kept m
view.

(vii) Every District Judge and Chief Judi-

cial Magistrate should have a State Vehicle,
Judicial officers in sets of 5 should have a
pool vehicle and others would be entitled to
suitable loans to acquire two wheeler automo-
biles within different time limits as speci-
fied.

(viii)Inservice Institute should be set up
within one year at the Central and State or
Union Territory level.